(Mishnah): One who carries a Midras may carry Terumah, but not Kodesh.

(R. Ba citing Rav Yehudah): This is due to a case that occurred. A case occurred in which one's barrel was punctured, and he sealed it with his sandal (which was a Midras of a Zav, and it was Metamei the contents of the barrel).

(R. Ze'irah citing R. Yosa citing R. Lazar): If one transgressed and carried [Kodesh while carrying a Midras, the Kodesh is still] Tahor.

This is like R. Lazar said - in some cases, Chachamim said not to carry, and if he transgressed and carried, it is Tamei. In some cases, Chachamim said not to carry, and if he transgressed and carried, it is Tahor.

Question (R. Ze'irah, to R. Mana): Does this not teach that they did not make the body [of one who eats] Terumah become like a Zav regarding Kodesh? If you will say that they made his body like a Zav regarding Kodesh, if he transgressed and carried, it would be Tamei [and all the more so one who carried a Midras, who may not eat Terumah]!

Answer (R. Mana): The case is, he regularly eats Kodesh. (He is zealous, so we do not decree about him. Perhaps we decree about others who do not regularly eat Kodesh, and are not zealous.

(Mishnah): The Midah of Kodesh is unlike the Midah of Terumah. For Kodesh, one unties [a garment] and dries the holes (in which the strings were), and afterwards he immerses it. For Terumah, one may tie and afterwards immerse it.

People who eat Terumah are zealous, and they clean it [so there will not be Chatzitzos]. People who eat Kodesh are not zealous, and they do not clean it. (Therefore we obligate them to untie it and dry the holes.)

(Mishnah): Kelim that were finished in Taharah must be immersed for Kodesh, but not for Terumah.

A Kli joins its contents for Kodesh, but not for Terumah.

A Revi'i (fourth level Tum'ah) of Kodesh is Pasul (disqualified, but cannot be Metamei others), and a Shelishi of Terumah.

If one of a person's hands became Tamei, the other is Tahor. For Kodesh, he must immerse both of them.

One hand is Metamei the other for Kodesh, but not for Terumah.

(Gemara - Beraisa): A case occurred in which a woman was weaving a garment in Taharah, and came in front of R. Yishmael to ask him. She said to him "I know that it did not become Tamei, but I did not put my mind to guard it.'' While checking her, she said "a Nidah came and spread it on the rope with me'';

At that time, R. Yishmael said "great are Chachamim's words! They said that Kelim finished in Taharah must be immersed for Kodesh, but not for Terumah.''

Another case occurred in which a woman was weaving a cloth in Taharah, and came in front of R. Yishmael to ask him. She said to him "I know that it did not become Tamei, but I did not put my mind to guard it.'' While checking her, she said "a thread snapped, and I tied it with my mouth.'' (RABBEINU YOSEF, in Tosfos 20a): (She was Tehorah, but wet saliva came on it. She wove it with Stam hands, which are Sheniyos, and touched the saliva.)

At that time, R. Yishmael said "great are Chachamim's words! They said that Kelim finished in Taharah must be immersed for Kodesh, but not for Terumah.''

(Beraisa): If one cuts a tube [to use] for Kodesh, one who cuts it or immerses it, he must immerse.

Question: Granted, one who cuts it [must immerse, for he must touch it. Why do we obligate Tevilah for] one who immerses it? He can wrap it in a shoot (carry it via something that does not receive Tum'ah) and immerse it! (May we infer that one who is not Tahor for Kodesh is like a Zav, and he is Metamei through carrying?)

Answer (R. Ila): It discusses one who cuts a tube for Kodesh with intent to immerse it. (Since he intended to immerse it, he did not guard it carefully. We cannot infer that he is like a Zav.)

(R. Yehoshua ben Levi): Until here (a Kli joins its contents for Kodesh, but not for Terumah) discusses [only] actual Kodesh. From here and onwards discusses [even] Chulin Al Taharas ha'Kodesh.

(R. Yochanan): We learn this (that a Kli joins its contents for Kodesh) from R. Akiva's testimony;

(Mishnah): R. Akiva added, Soles (of Shirei Menachos, i.e. the remainder after Kemitzah was taken), Ketores, Levonah and coals that a Tevul Yom touched part of them, he disqualified all of them.

(Reish Lakish): [Chachamim] knew that a Kli Kodesh joins them. ("Kaf Achas'' teaches that the Kli joins its contents.) What did [R. Akiva] come to testify about? It was about Shirei Menachos, that they join themselves [even if they no longer need a Kli].

(R. Yosah bei R. Zaminah citing R. Yochanan): Why did they say that Shirei Menachos join themselves? It is because they needed [to be entirely in] their Kli [at the time of Kemitzah].

(R. Acha citing R. Ila citing R. Yosa): [Chachamim] knew that a Kli Kodesh joins them. What did [R. Akiva] come to testify about? It was about Soles, Ketores, Levonah and coals. (Even a Chulin Kli joins them.)

Question (against R. Yochanan): Granted, Soles, Ketores, Levonah (for each, all of it was needed). What is [the case of] coals? (Why do all join? Not all of them are needed!)

Answer #1 (R. Bun bar Kahana): It discusses coals of Yom Kipur. Whatever he scoops [from the Mizbe'ach] he brings [into the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim], but not coals of any [other] day;

This is like a Mishnah teaches, (that he took about four Kavim from the Mizbe'ach, poured about three into the Machtah, and) about a Kav of coals scattered. He swept them to the Amah. On Shabbos, he inverts a big domed shaped Kli over them.

Objection (and Answer #2 - R. Matanyah): Do Soles, Ketores and Levonah have a Shi'ur [that must be in the Kli, therefore the Kli joins them]? Is it not because they needed [to be in] their Kli? Here (also regarding coals), they needed their Kli!

Question (R. Bun bar Chiyah): May a Kometz be offered in two Kelim?

Objection (and answer - R. Chanin): Our Mishnah teaches that a Kli joins [its contents for Kodesh]. If you will say that a Kometz may be offered in two Kelim, for what matter [must it join?! Rather, surely one may not offer it in two Kelim.]

Rejection #1 (R. Lazar of the south): (We can say that one may offer it in two Kelim.) Did not R. Yosi bei R. Zaminah citing R. Yochanan say, why did they say that Shirei Menachos join themselves? Is it not because they needed their Kli [at the time of Kemitzah]? Here, they needed their Kli!

Rejection #2 (R. Mataniyah): Are Soles, Ketores, Levonah and coals not offered in multiple Kelim, and you say that the Kli joins [i.e. for Tum'ah? Also] here, the Kli joins! (We explained this like PNEI MOSHE.)

Question (Kahana, to Rabanan of there (from Bavel)): A Minchah divided in a Kli, and one part became Tamei - does the other part become Tamei?

Answer (Rabanan): If this became Tamei, this becomes Tamei.

Question (Kahana): Does Tum'ah jump?!

Answer (Rabanan): Tum'ah jumps.

Question (Kahana): Is this even if something else is in between?

Answer (Rabanan): It is even if something else is in between.

Question (Kahana): May one take a Kometz from this to [exempt] this? (Is Tziruf Kli mid'Oraisa?)

Answer: We did not hear this, but we heard a Mishnah like it says below, if two Menachos from which Kemitzah was not taken became mixed with each other, if one can take a Kometz from this by itself and from this by itself, they are Kosher [even though part of the Minchah is separate from the part from which he takes Kemitzah]. If not, they are Pasul;

Do not its Shirayim separate in between?! (Even so, one may take Kemitzah from one part for all of it.)

(R. Yakov bar Acha citing R. Yosa citing R. Yochanan): One may take a Kometz from this to this. If this became Tamei, this became Tamei, but the middle is not Tamei.

Question: Was it not taught "Kaf Achas'' - [a Kli Shares] makes what is inside it one! (Also the middle should become Tamei!)

Answer (R. Chinenah): A Kli joins only what is proper for it.

Question (Reish Lakish): A dry part of a Minchah (if was not mixed with oil. Even so, it receives Tum'ah, due to Chibas ha'Kodesh. Does this only enable it to become Pasul, or) do we count levels of Tum'ah for it [and it can be Metamei others]?

Objection (and answer - R. Lazar): (This is obvious!) "Mi'Kol ha'Ochel Asher Ye'achel Asher Yavo Alav Mayim Yitma'' - what receives Tum'ah through water [or one of the other six liquids coming on it], it makes a count [to be Metamei others]. What does not receive Tum'ah through water, it does not make a count.

Question (R. Yosi): Nivlas Ohf Tahor receives Tum'as Ochlim without Hechsher [of a liquid] and without [Tum'ah], because in the end it is Metamei a severe Tum'ah (it is Metamei one who eats it)!

Question: What was the conclusion?

Answer: "Mi'Kol ha'Ochel Asher Ye'achel'' - what is Tamei due to Ochel, it makes a count [to be Metamei others]. What is not Tamei due to Ochel, it does not make a count.